Climate change and y2k

# 4059

Many people make connections between what they see as hysteria about climate change now parallelling hysteria about Y2K. There is a fundamental misperception here, the kind that is very hard to rectify. I worked in the White House in 98 and 99 with John Koskinen and visited many corporations and government offices and did workshops with the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. The issue was always what to expect from the date rollover and what to do. The message in 98 was that we just did not know. We had examples of potential system failures from the inability to handle 4 digit years but no idea as to the distribution of problems. We know, much more about climate vulnerabilities than we did computer vulnerabilities in 1999.

.But as awareness increased from reports from the field efforts increased, almost all behind the scenes. It early emerged that admitting to having a Y2K problem suggested to boards of directors that management had failed to do its job. The actual process of examining code accelerated. Companies like Fanny Mae built entire mirroring backup systems that cost millions of dollars.s Submarines were basically taken apart. Many companies had for the first time a full accounting of the computer systems they had, and this led to systems mapping, simplifications and rationalizing, and upgrades. So much so that some of us were predicting a recession in 2000 based on the amount of money that was being spent on new equipment in 98 and 99. The treasurer of one New England state told me that they had spent their entire computer budget through 2002 on new equipment and consulting services in 99. I was a daily participant observing these efforts and they were extreme around the world. I was able to join teams in Mexico and Greece where efforts were very sophisticated in assessing inventory and systems needs.

When the Y2K rollover occurred on January 1, there was little reported damage. I was aware of some failures that were not reported to senior management nor to the press, but for the most part, systems deemed vulnerable and rebuilt performed well. All of which suggests lots of really good efforts and great results. But there was nothing to report at the headline level. The culture among managers worldwide quickly emerged saying that it was a sign of weakness to have had a Y2K problem so narratives went to near zero.

The parallel now with Climate would be worth some serious time. What I see is that Y2K was internal to organizations so blame could be ascribed. Not true for climate change (except maybe in the energy companies). Moreover, Y2K had a goal - to fix the systems. There is, among thoughtful people, no goal of recovery to the previous state of the energy system. It is much worse with climate, but the underreporting is painfully similar. Part of the problem is that the work done was heroic and unappreciated.